76 year old mother convinced into buying tyres she did not need by kwik fit

[Rooferjohn]

Kwik fit Amersham

During a recent service My 76 year old mother was told she needed 4 new tyres on her car because they were older than 5 years. They had put an MOT on the car the week before and no mention was made about the condition of the tyres.  The car is 6 years old and has done 4000 miles,

 

when my mother asked why they needed replacing if they had passed the MOT she was told the tyres don't get checked during it. My mother agreed to have them replaced believing they were unsafe and on the advice from the garage.

The only reason kwick fit can give for advising the tyres needed changing is because they were over 5 years old.

After doing my own research including information from their own website there is absolutely no reason to change a tyre because of its age and it's quite reasonable to expect 10 years life from a Set.

I feel they have taken advantage of my mother by falsely claiming her tyres needed changing based upon this make-believe 5 year rule, when in fact her tyres were in a perfectly safe and roadworthy condition.

 

Can anyone offer a 3rd party perspective 

Edited November 24, 2021 by dx100uk
added A few blank lines only..dx

[Nobby_v]

I worked for Kwik Fit many years back.

 

Does not surprise me. 

 

Neighbour of mine, also female was also convinced to spend money she didn't need. Husband went back and got a full refund. 

 

It's not subjective with tyres. MOT would have covered the age and replacement issue. Or as is the case didn't. 

 

[CraigMcK]

Well it seems they did not even look at their own instructions. 
 

Tyre Age - How Old Are My Tyres? - Quick Kwik Fit Guide | Kwik Fit

WWW.KWIK-FIT.COM

---

Old tyres can begin to crack and perish making them dangerous. Identify the age of your tyres with this simple guide from...

 

[Rooferjohn]

I pointed out the information on their own website contradicted what they told my mother. It's disgusting behaviour , she is so upset with herself. I spoke with customer service who listened to the call they said my mother agreed to having them fitted  they don't seem to care that she only agreed as she was made to feel her tyres were unsafe and it's standard procedure to change to them due to age.

They have the call recorded, do you know if I have the right to a copy of it?

[dx100uk]

yes send them an sar on behalf of her.

 

 

[Rooferjohn]

A follow up to my op

 

I received a call from the branch manger today, he said after listening to the tapes it was clear that new tyres were only  recommended to my mother and not as I suggested a must.

 

I got to listen to the tape and he did choose his words carefully. My mother was clearly distressed from the moment he mentioned replacing all four tyres.

 

During the call he used the word recommend rather than need and followed it up with what could go wrong with tyres of that age. My mother questioned the need to replace them a few times including asking how comes they were deemed ok for the MOT.

 

She was told that the MOT just checks the bare minimum safety of the tyres and wouldn't mention poor condition, I questioned this as I would expect an MOT to offer at least an advisory if the tyres were in poor condition.

 

The part of the call that I feel most annoying is when My mother, clearly sounding confused and upset asks/states "if you are definitely saying the tyres need replacing then you had better do them" 

 

at this point I would have expected them to clarify things to her and make it clear they don't need replacing we are just recommending they be changed, instead he mumbles his words and and proceeds to authorise the replacement.

 

Is there any consumer laws that would cover this. Kwik fits stance is we only ever advised on new tyres but my mother clearly only agreed of they definitely needed replacing which they didn't.

 

 

Edited November 26, 2021 by dx100uk
added A few blank lines only..dx

[Nobby_v]

I don't have time for a full response this evening. 

 

Kwik Fit are clearly not stating that correctly.

 

The guidance is clear and here.  I assume I can post a link to the Gov Guidance

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-for-private-passenger-and-light-commercial-vehicles/5-axles-wheels-tyres-and-suspension#section-5-2-3

 

Perhaps they are in breach of not doing the mot correctly or in breach of not saying that 'the replacement' is advisory by our standards just not by the less stringent Government guidelines.

 

I'd be asking for a refund. 

 

Definitely is a funny word.

Wonder why calls are recorded? 

Perhaps they've had problems before. 

 

 

[stu007]

Nobby_v

 

Just to clarify for you yes you can post that link you have provide in your post.

 

Here is the full link: (Remember to got to 5.2.3. Tyres)

 

5. Axles, wheels, tyres and suspension - MOT inspection manual: cars and passenger vehicles - Guidance - GOV.UK

WWW.GOV.UK

---

Inspection processes and rules for car, private bus and light commercial vehicle (class 3, 4, 5 and 7 vehicle) MOT tests.

 

 

[Nobby_v]

 

Good morning.

 

Couple of things  here. 

 

1. Kwik Fits own MOT inspection revealed that the tyres were in line with motoring law and the Government guidelines - the previous tyres obviously me with all 

standards for safety and the law. 

2. Kwik fit obviously apply a 'best practice' standard which is clearly higher than the legal requirement and indeed makes sense. The law is of course a minimum legal 

requirement and of course to be well above the law and to make sure you are safer than just safe makes sense for those that understand these things. 

 

Were the removed items offered back to your mother. The return of parts of is a default option in order to provide the chance of second inspection and to allow

the risk of independent inspection - therefore making sure that only parts that needed replacement were actually replaced.It is still common practice, not sure about KF

 

it does sound like your mother was put under a good deal of pressure, something that all Kwik Fit staff are trained to do - sell/upsell I was one of the first managers to go

through their new training programme as a manager (1980 - 81) having previously worked for Euro Exhaust - and having never used once since, nor would I. 

 

I would be inclined to ask them for the evidence that these tyres needed replacing,  ask them why it was not explained about their own higher standards for tyres, and put it to them that they have taken advantage of an elderly member of the public but don't threaten anything.  

 

All of this  is pointing to an oversell to an elderly woman - an easy mark in my opinion.  

 

There is also the issue of their own guidance- they recommend inspection at least every five years! 

 

From their website. 

How long do tyres last?

There is no standard rule for how long tyres should last before they need replacing. Generally, it is recommended that front tyres should last for approximately 20,000 miles and rear tyres should last 40,000. However, many factors influence the rate at which tyres degrade; including driving conditions, weight carried, and driving habits. Fast driving and harsh weather conditions can lead your tyres to deteriorate much faster. At Kwik Fit, we recommend that you have your tyres professionally checked at least once every 5 years. If you think your tyres are getting close to needing replacements , or even just for peace of mind, why not bring your tyres in to Kwik Fit for a free tyre check."

 

I hope that helps.